Robert Bassett v. Paul Lamantia
2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 9025
| 9th Cir. | 2017Background
- At ~12:30 a.m., Billings Officer Paul Lamantia pursued a fleeing suspect who jumped into plaintiff Robert Bassett’s backyard; Lamantia followed and dropped his flashlight.
- Bassett came outside to investigate; Lamantia, seeing Bassett approach, tackled him believing Bassett might be a threat, then released him when he realized Bassett was not a threat.
- Bassett later reported injury and was diagnosed with a torn rotator cuff; he sued Lamantia and the City of Billings asserting § 1983 and state-law negligence claims.
- The district court granted summary judgment for defendants, concluding the public duty doctrine shielded them from Bassett’s negligence claim.
- The Ninth Circuit panel certified to the Montana Supreme Court the question whether Montana’s public duty doctrine shields a law‑enforcement officer from negligence liability when the officer is the direct and sole cause of the plaintiff’s harm.
- The Ninth Circuit noted Montana precedent addressing the public duty doctrine generally but found no controlling Montana decision on whether the doctrine applies when the officer himself directly causes the injury; the court stayed proceedings pending Montana’s answer.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Montana's public duty doctrine bars negligence liability where a law‑enforcement officer is the direct and sole cause of injury | Bassett: public duty doctrine should not shield an officer who directly and solely causes harm | Lamantia/City: public duty doctrine applies and bars the negligence claim | Question certified to Montana Supreme Court for resolution; Ninth Circuit stayed proceedings |
Key Cases Cited
- Gatlin-Johnson v. City of Miles City, 367 Mont. 414 (Mont. 2012) (explains that the public duty doctrine precludes liability for duties owed to the general public rather than to a particular plaintiff)
- Gonzales v. City of Bozeman, 352 Mont. 145 (Mont. 2009) (applied public duty doctrine where plaintiff was harmed by a third party later arrested by police)
- Nelson v. Driscoll, 295 Mont. 363 (Mont. 1999) (analyzed public duty doctrine where plaintiff was killed by a drunk driver)
- Kent v. City of Columbia Falls, 379 Mont. 190 (Mont. 2015) (directs courts to determine whether a governmental defendant owed a specific duty to the plaintiff; did not definitively resolve whether an officer-caused injury is excepted)
- Jones v. State, 425 Md. 1 (Md. 2012) (holds public duty doctrine does not apply when law enforcement itself is the alleged injurious force)
- Moses v. Young, 149 N.C. App. 613 (N.C. Ct. App. 2002) (declines to apply public duty doctrine to shield acts that directly caused injury or death)
- Liser v. Smith, 254 F. Supp. 2d 89 (D.D.C. 2003) (concludes public duty doctrine is inapposite where officers directly caused the harm rather than failing to protect from third parties)